Yaa! Abortion is back in the news- actual concern about new 'bounty' provision

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Before this becomes a complete crap-fest, just a couple of procedural things that I think are relevant to us:

The MSM making it out to be that it was some sweeping decision when it was a vote procedural issues. Standing- it's a bitch. And the left has jammed that down our throats for decades. Remember when the guys who wrote, ran and paid for Prop8 (sanctity of marriage) ballot measure in CA weren't allowed to defend it in court because they, of all people, didn't have 'standing'. So F the dems.

Funny, I don't hear much about 'democracy' and voice of the people... this is a law by duly elected officials, where are the dems demanding that we protect voting and representatives? So F the dems.

Psaki- she narrowly got out of the low blow she did to the male reporter. He's a male so he doesn't have a say abortion? Uhm, Jen have you ever had an abortion, since you are the final say on this? Uhm, Jen, according to your side, men can have babies too... And lastly, why is this a female only issue? Weren't we all babies? Doesn't that give us all a say? OR are you holding the unborn hostage? God, I used to have a thing for red heads, but after this dumb-ass, she cured me. So F the Dems...

Finally, and really the main part of my reason for bringing this up- the structure of the law. It's hard to get the actual legal issues and structure of the law, but the 'bounty' is interesting. Reminds me of the ADA compliance lawsuit/shakedowns. But what I'm concerned about is the left taking a similar strategy on guns. Not sure how it could actually work, but I could see them, with their lack of respect of the 1A and 2A that if you post something about being progun or say that looters should be shot, that they could sue you for formenting or enabling violence. Any Texas lawyers have any insights into the law and how that approach might work on different areas?

[Inkslinger]

Seeing as per capita, more black babies are aborted than any other race, if you’re pro abortion you must be a racist. Isn’t that how we determine reality now a days…?

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Seeing as per capita, more black babies are aborted than any other race, if you’re pro abortion you must be a racist. Isn’t that how we determine reality now a days…?

Come on, we all know it is global warming that is something, something, abortion.

Any chance of a bounty based anti-2A law?

[Inkslinger]

Come on, we all know it is global warming that is something, something, abortion.

Any chance of a bounty based anti-2A law?

If there is, I hope they’re toting bear spray like Dog The Bounty Hunter.

[SteyrAUG]

So my basic 101 problem is this.

1. Men don't get to decide if the baby is kept, even if they really want it.

2. Men are automatically made financially responsible for any children.

If "choice" to conceive is 100% up to the female than the male should not be held financially responsible for a choice he had no say in.

[davidjinks]

I’m subscribing to your news letter! Please tell me more!

So my basic 101 problem is this.

1. Men don't get to decide if the baby is kept, even if they really want it.

2. Men are automatically made financially responsible for any children.

If "choice" to conceive is 100% up to the female than the male should not be held financially responsible for a choice he had no say in.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Absolutely. I have said that for years and get little more than howls insults from women. They definitely want to cherry pick the best of feminism and paternalism.

So my basic 101 problem is this.

1. Men don't get to decide if the baby is kept, even if they really want it.

2. Men are automatically made financially responsible for any children.

If "choice" to conceive is 100% up to the female than the male should not be held financially responsible for a choice he had no say in.

[titsonritz]

So my basic 101 problem is this.

1. Men don't get to decide if the baby is kept, even if they really want it.

2. Men are automatically made financially responsible for any children.

If "choice" to conceive is 100% up to the female than the male should not be held financially responsible for a choice he had no say in.

And yes, 100%.

[Arik]

Umm...I don't care what Jen thinks. She has no right to assume my gender. Furthermore she has no right to assume who can and can't be birthing people.

You say all it takes to be a woman is to say you're a woman so I demand an apology for assuming I can/can't be a berthing person or that I'm or am not woman!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.new...598343%3famp=1

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usa...amp/5054296001

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[veeref]

Before this becomes a complete crap-fest, just a couple of procedural things that I think are relevant to us:

The MSM making it out to be that it was some sweeping decision when it was a vote procedural issues. Standing- it's a bitch. And the left has jammed that down our throats for decades. Remember when the guys who wrote, ran and paid for Prop8 (sanctity of marriage) ballot measure in CA weren't allowed to defend it in court because they, of all people, didn't have 'standing'. So F the dems.

Funny, I don't hear much about 'democracy' and voice of the people... this is a law by duly elected officials, where are the dems demanding that we protect voting and representatives? So F the dems.

Psaki- she narrowly got out of the low blow she did to the male reporter. He's a male so he doesn't have a say abortion? Uhm, Jen have you ever had an abortion, since you are the final say on this? Uhm, Jen, according to your side, men can have babies too... And lastly, why is this a female only issue? Weren't we all babies? Doesn't that give us all a say? OR are you holding the unborn hostage? God, I used to have a thing for red heads, but after this dumb-ass, she cured me. So F the Dems...

Finally, and really the main part of my reason for bringing this up- the structure of the law. It's hard to get the actual legal issues and structure of the law, but the 'bounty' is interesting. Reminds me of the ADA compliance lawsuit/shakedowns. But what I'm concerned about is the left taking a similar strategy on guns. Not sure how it could actually work, but I could see them, with their lack of respect of the 1A and 2A that if you post something about being progun or say that looters should be shot, that they could sue you for formenting or enabling violence. Any Texas lawyers have any insights into the law and how that approach might work on different areas?

With regards to your last part about the way the law was written, my trust attorney emailed us this:

https://www.ctmtips.com/doug-turner-texas-law-note/

Apparently it is quite relevant to the 2A.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk